Comments on: Pixeljunk 1-6 announced, heading to PC in 2013http://www.vg247.com/2012/11/02/pixeljunk-1-6-announced-heading-to-pc-in-2013/
VG247.comTue, 29 Jul 2014 08:36:38 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.1By: TheWulfhttp://www.vg247.com/2012/11/02/pixeljunk-1-6-announced-heading-to-pc-in-2013/comment-page-1/#comment-420083
Fri, 02 Nov 2012 17:58:49 +0000http://www.vg247.com/?p=312606#comment-420083When were they ever a PS3 exclusive company? They started there because that’s where they felt the money was. But what more and more indie companies are finding is because consoles are so ridiculous cost-wise to indies, that they have trouble just breaking even. Whereas on other platforms like mobile and computer, they find that they’re raking in some pretty wild profits.

This isn’t saying anything negative against consoles, but simply the management styles of Sony and Microsoft. Whereas on Steam it’s getting ever easier and easier to get your game on there, and compared to the exorbitant costs of consoles, it’s an absolute steal. So what you’re finding is that more and more developers are moving to computer and/or mobile.

I’ll state it again: I’m not saying anything bad about consoles, but in this new climate, if Microsoft and Sony want their consoles to survive, they need to pull their lumbering arses out of the past. With distribution so easy on computers and mobile devices of all kinds (PC and Android especially), it means that computers and mobile devices are where the money is if you’re not a triple-A developer.

This is why you had Super Meat Boy and Cthulhu Saves the World making so much profit via computer/mobile that it made their console sales look completely redundant and flaccid by comparison. Both ended up considering the sales they got on consoles to be insignificant compared to the sales they were getting on computer/mobile. And this is a very worrying thing, this is something Sony and Microsoft need to fix.

On the topic of Pixeljunk games specifically – they already tested the waters by bringing one of their games to the PC. I own and love it. This endeavour must have been extremely successful for them, so much so that they’ve decided to just bring the rest to the PC. This delights me, because I own a couple of them on the PS3, but I don’t play on the PS3 enough to justify owning the complete collection.

What indie developers really need to be wary of going forward is exclusivity deals. That will land you firmly in screwed-land. Like thatgamecompany has been. Like with Super Meat Boy, they’d probably find an increase of sales by around 300+% for titles like flOwer and Journey. If you look at both of those titles, their souls are almost mobile titles as is, they’d fit in with the iOS and Android libraries perfectly.

Mobile owners seem to be fans of artsy-fartsy games. PS3 owners? Not so much. This is just really paying attention to what developers have said in the past, and I really feel for thatgamecompany being stuck in an exclusivity deal, to be honest. I hope it’s financially worth it, for them, as they could likely make many times the profit on mobile. And then computer would just be the cherry on top.

Consoles are really better with triple-A titles. Whereas more niche and/or indie titles don’t flourish there against the likes of Assassin’s Creed and Call of Duty. This is the divide we’re seeing, now. This is how the gaming climate is. We’re getting indies from every country flocking to computers and mobile devices. Even Japan, in some cases. And it’s good for them. They have to do what’s good for them.

If they make more profits on computers/mobile devices, then that’s where they need to be. But before I get flamed, let me run over why indies get screwed on console:

* They take a sizeable cut from their profits to have their game hosted.

* They need to pay for development kits.

* They need to pay for QA assessments.

* They need to wait half a year for the game to actually hit the store.

* Their game is often buried, consoles favouring triple-A ads. This means that the presence on any console’s store is minimal, and barely anyone will even know that the game is out for their system. (This happened to the Super Meat Boy and Cthulhu Saves the World devs.)

Now here’s how it is on computers/mobile:

* You can sell a game from your own site (computer and Android). Therefore you can completely cut out the middle-man. Then how you handle the advertising is up to you. But reaching computer/mobile users via social networks is easier – they’re naturally more wired into the ‘net.

* Both computer and mobile sales platforms give indies a hell of a lot of presence. They’re often incredibly generous. You’ll see indies being given big ads for long periods on Steam, the iOS app store, and Google Play all the time. On these platforms, being triple-A doesn’t give you the right to bury indies.

* You don’t need to buy development kits. Stuff like Unity exists, and you can use that instead, and just have a reasonable cut taken from your profits. Don’t want that to happen? Develop your own engine, or use any number of open source engines.

* You don’t need to pay for QA assessments. And you wouldn’t believe how ridiculously expensive these are, there was an interview with Prison Architect developer Introversion about how gouging these are, and how they can leave a small development house penniless, let alone an indie dev. These aren’t even a thing on computers/mobile devices.

* For Android and computers at least, there is very little delay before a game goes up on a storefront. There might be a little, but you’re talking a week or two rather than six months.

And if you don’t believe this, then go and check out the Prison Architect interviews.

Again, I’m not being negative to console owners. You guys actually need to pipe up and make a noise about this, because Sony and Microsoft are basically making consoles almost impossible for indies and small developers to make games for. They can’t co-exist with triple-A because they get buried by triple-A ads and exorbitant costs. It shouldn’t be that way.

But as long as it is that way, you’ll see this divide grow. You’ll have more and more small/indie devs going to computers and/or mobile devices.

So, Pixeljunk finding that their first test on the PC went really well? Not surprising. Finding that it went so well that they’re now eager to port their entire library to the PC? Also not surprising. Steam isn’t going to price-gouge them, Steam will advertise them.

If Sony/Microsoft want to retain any indie/small devs, they need to look at Steam and think to themselves ‘we need to stop treating indie/small devs like third class citizens, we do need to be like Steam.’

—Edit—

I realised it might be worth adding some clarity to my statement about more arty games. Allow me to do that, because the reasoning behind it is explained in my post, but it’s a little disjointed.

When you go to a console’s storefront, what do you see? It’s mostly big name stuff. You’ll see Activision, EA, Ubisoft, and essentially people which have a lot of money. Since advertising on consoles is dominated by who has the most money. On PS3 and 360, you have to see that the indies are often buried. It’s like they’re the red-headed stepchild, the unwanted.

So what this is saying to consumers on many levels is: You don’t want those filthy indie games. Instead, look at these big, shiny, expensive triple-A titles. Those indie games are just for cheap, stingy bastards. Don’t look at them.

This is the vibe you get by how buried they are. Even exclusive stuff tends to be buried behind the torrent of triple-A stuff you get on consoles. On the PS3 and the 360, your attention is drawn away. You’re essentially trained over time to believe that triple-A titles naturally have more worth. So an arty indie title like flOewr isn’t going to have so much worth. It’s not triple-A, it doesn’t have violence and explosions. It must therefore be bad.

This is the way that console storefronts train people to think. And this is why things are hard for indie devs and small devs. Because their games often aren’t about what triple-A games are about. Triple-A games are about instant gratification, they’re about being very visceral. An indie/small dev game won’t be. Can you imagine how hard it would be trying to sell the idea of a game like Trine 2 to a Call of Duty fan?

And that’s the problem. Console storefronts train you to think of games which aren’t triple-A as being lesser somehow. Of presenting less worth and less quality, of not speaking to what you want. THAT is the problem.

Steam doesn’t do this. GoG, Gamer’s Gate, and others don’t do this. Google Play doesn’t do this. the Amazon storefront on Android doesn’t do this. Apple’s iOS storefront doesn’t do this. It’s exclusive to consoles and the mentality behind their business practices. So you’re taught to look at the shiny new triple-A title, and to ignore the smaller, more arty indie title.

So what you have is that people who own computers and mobile devices are more willing to realise the worth of non triple-A titles. We have them advertised to us in our social space and on our storefronts. It’s easy to sell a game like Trine 2 to a computer or mobile device owner, because they’ve been tempted to play games like that before. Because people in their social space are talking about how great it is, because their storefronts are advertising these games to them.

So on computers and mobile devices, you have this atmosphere of being open to new experiences. On consoles, the nature of things tends to veer more towards triple-A only. This is why I’m hoping that any poor sod who’s found themselves stuck with an exclusivity agreement will find their way out of it. Because until Sony and Microsoft change the atmosphere of their audience and the ecology of their store, indie/small dev games aren’t going to sell well.

Dear Esther sold pretty well on the PC.

Could you imagine trying to sell Dear Esther to the average 360 user?

Yeah, I mean. It’s not the console owner’s fault. They just go with what they know. And thanks to the storefronts presenting a very narrow view of what gaming can offer, triple-A is almost entirely what they know. And that’s a fucking shame. But that’s how consoles are right now. Sony and Microsoft need to fix that shit, they need to fix it or risk losing all indie/small devs.

]]>By: DrDamnhttp://www.vg247.com/2012/11/02/pixeljunk-1-6-announced-heading-to-pc-in-2013/comment-page-1/#comment-419938
Fri, 02 Nov 2012 12:34:20 +0000http://www.vg247.com/?p=312606#comment-419938@4
If they would have been and wanted to be I’m pretty sure it would have happened. I would assume and also agree they think they are better off with their independence.
]]>By: OlderGamerhttp://www.vg247.com/2012/11/02/pixeljunk-1-6-announced-heading-to-pc-in-2013/comment-page-1/#comment-419929
Fri, 02 Nov 2012 12:23:11 +0000http://www.vg247.com/?p=312606#comment-419929@Doc, true, but like other Sony Icons, I am sure a lot of people would think they are a Sony only. Might have made a solid aqusition on Sonys part.
]]>By: DrDamnhttp://www.vg247.com/2012/11/02/pixeljunk-1-6-announced-heading-to-pc-in-2013/comment-page-1/#comment-419874
Fri, 02 Nov 2012 09:08:19 +0000http://www.vg247.com/?p=312606#comment-419874@2
They’ve never been a PS3 exclusive studio – though I think they had a deal to create a certain number of titles for PS3. They do Nintendo DS stuff too (like the Star fox 64 adaptation and DSiWare releases). PixelJunk Eden also released on PC.
]]>By: Gadzooks!http://www.vg247.com/2012/11/02/pixeljunk-1-6-announced-heading-to-pc-in-2013/comment-page-1/#comment-419873
Fri, 02 Nov 2012 08:57:53 +0000http://www.vg247.com/?p=312606#comment-419873So have they abandoned PS3?
]]>By: ibrahackhttp://www.vg247.com/2012/11/02/pixeljunk-1-6-announced-heading-to-pc-in-2013/comment-page-1/#comment-419871
Fri, 02 Nov 2012 08:22:31 +0000http://www.vg247.com/?p=312606#comment-419871Pretty awesome! This is my favorite studio ever!
]]>